This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
One recent book analyzes the role of sub-national jurisdictions in immigrant settlement and integration in Australia, Canada, the USA, Germany, Belgium, Switzerland and Spain. See: Immigrant Integration in Federal Countries, C. Jopke and L. Seidle, eds. (McGill-Queen’s University Press 2013). In addition, some issues relevant to the discussion of immigration federalism have been explored in Managing Immigration and Diversity in Canada: A Transatlantic Dialogue in the New Age of Migration, Dan Rodriguez-Garcia, ed (Montreal & Kingston: Queen’s Policy Studies Series, 2012).
- 2.
Vineberg’s position on the United States (i.e., that US enforcement policies are mainly centralized) may seem at first sight radically different from the positions of other authors in this volume (i.e., Chacón and Aldana). However, Vineberg focuses only on the “formal” allocation of power and, namely that the US Constitution does not allow states to directly control the entry of non-citizens into their territory. He does not consider the situation on the ground (i.e., the devolution by the federal government of some of their traditional functions in immigration to states and localities).
- 3.
As of July 1, 2012, federal department of Citizenship and Immigration requires all nominees in semi- and low-skilled professions to undergo mandatory language testing, but no such mandatory testing is required for skilled workers nominated under PTNPs (CIC 2012).
- 4.
In fact, Quebec has served as an example for other provinces who sought greater role in immigrant selection (Vineberg 2008).
- 5.
See, e.g., Canada—Québec Accord Relating to Immigration and Temporary Admission of Aliens, (February 5, 1991), s. 2, online: Citizenship and Immigration Canada http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/policy/fed-prov/can-que.html
References
Baglay, S., Nakache, D. (2013). The Implications of Immigration Federalism for Non-citizens’ Rights and Immigration Opportunities: Canada and Australia compared. American Review of Canadian Studies, 43(3), 334-357.
CIC. (2011). Evaluation of the Provincial Nominee Program. http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/resources/evaluation/pnp/index.asp. Access May 15, 2013
Citizenship, and Immigration Canada (CIC). (2012). News Release-Minister Kenney strengthens economic value of provincial immigration programs. http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/department/media/releases/2012/2012-04-11.asp. Access May 15, 2013
Dauvergne, C. (1997). Beyond justice: The consequences of liberalism for immigration law. 10 Canadian Journal of Law & Jurisprudence 323.
Dauvergne, C. (2004). Sovereignty, migration and the rule of law in global times. Modern Law Review, 67(4), 588–615.
Dobrowolsky, A. (2013). Nuancing neoliberalism: lessons learned from a failed immigration experiment. Journal of International Migration and Integration, 14, 197–218.
Immigrant Integration in Federal Countries (2013). C. Joppke and L. Seidle (Eds.) McGill-Queen’s University Press.
Kyambi, S. (2004). National identity and refugee law. In P. Fitzpatrick & P. Tuitt (Eds.), Critical beings: Law, nation and the global subject. Burlington: Ashgate.
Lewis, N. (2010). A decade later: assessing successes and challenges in Manitoba’s Provincial Immigrant Nominee Program. Canadian Public Policy, 36(2), 241-264
Pham, H. (2008). The private enforcement of immigration laws. Georgetown Law Journal, 96(3), 777–826.
Pham, H. (2009). When immigration borders move. Florida Law Review, 61, 1115.
Reitz, J. G. (2005). Tapping immigrants’ skills: New direction for Canadian immigration policy in the knowledge economy. IRPP Choices, 11, 1–7.
Schuck, P. S. (2007). Taking immigration federalism seriously. University of Chicago Legal Forum, 57–92.
Siemiatycki, M., & Triadafilopoulos, P. (2010). International Perspectives on Immigrant Service Provision. Mowat Centre for Policy Innovation Paper. http://www.mowatcentre.ca/pdfs/mowatResearch/13.pdf. Last accessed May 15, 2013
Spiro, P. (2002). Federalism and immigration: models and trends. International Social Science Journal, 53, 67–73
Su, R. (2008). Notes on the multiple facets of immigration federalism. Buffalo Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2008–2011.
United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division. (2011). Trends in International Migrant Stock: Migrants by Age and Sex. database, POP/DB/MIG/Stock/Rev.2011. http://esa.un.org/MigAge/p2k0data.asp. Access May 15, 2013
Varsanyi, M. W. (2008). Rescaling the “Alien,” rescaled personhood: Neoliberalism, immigration and the state. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 98(4), 877–896.
Varsanyi, M. et al. (2012). A multilayered jurisdictional patchwork: Immigration federalism in the United States. Law and Policy, 34(2), 138–158.
Vineberg, R. (2008, September). Immigration to the Prairies Returning to Historical Levels, Canada West Foundation. http://www.cwf.ca/V2/cnt/commentaries_200810140940.php. Access May 15, 2013
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer Science + Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Baglay, S., Nakache, D. (2014). Introduction. In: Baglay, S., Nakache, D. (eds) Immigration Regulation in Federal States. International Perspectives on Migration, vol 9. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-8604-1_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-8604-1_1
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-017-8603-4
Online ISBN: 978-94-017-8604-1
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawSocial Sciences (R0)